Calling out Grover Norquist

Norquist...
People who have been bought and paid for have little to debate about...

When the phone don't ring, you'll know it's Grover!

All leftists duck the debate. They are unable to answer facts, so they pretend they (the facts) don't exist.

Smells like Mr. Norquist has been playing with "Little Green Footballs!" And, as we all learned, makes for a lopsided and left-leaning playing field. What a pity, to journey from maturity back to puberty. I'll bet it was a short trip.

Leftists enact truth by proclamation. No debate required. Saves so much time you know.

Imagine someone from Fritz Kuhn's Bund, or Fritz Kuhn himself (see John Roy Carlson's "Under Cover") sitting in Washington, meeting with high officials, organizing political interest groups, all without raising an eyebrow, secure in his position and his ability to function without alarming anyone. Now comes Grover Norquist, married to a Muslim and, we must assume, by now as the Shari'a requires a Muslim himself, doing whatever he can -- and he can keep people out, keep people down, prevent issues from being raised or security concerns addressed, do all kinds of things having to do with Islam, all while camouflaged as nothing more than an "Anti-Tax Activist" or whatever he wants to be perceived as, and nothing more.

Those who, possibly because they think Norquist is, in the main, "opposed to taxes" which, some believe, is always and everywhere a good thing and what's more, for some reason entitled to the word "conservative," and who, as a consequence of their own narrow view, are prepared to ignore everything else he stands for, or is promoting, sometimes openly and sometimes in other ways, things that have nothing to do with taxes and everything with the promotion and defense of Islam, and causes readily recognized as Islamic, have lost their wits and their moral sense.

Many coiled anacolutha at the base of various phrases in the last paragraph above; that's what comes of trusting fingers to follow thoughts, and thoughts to be grammatical.

This Norquest guy does not pass the smell test and has an odor similar to a rancid little green football.

Jihad-watch is a school that has given the facts re Islam. I think Spencer and Pamela had better be as careful with this Norquest guy, as careful as they should be with the Foot Baller.

These kind of clowns engage in bumper-sticker ("fascist" e.g.)attacks on their opponents which are devoid of any intellectual content, and the attacks come from a control-freak mentality. They are usually designed to charge the victim (as with Geller) with things that are most upsetting to them on an emotional level. It's manipulation.

Norquest is a scumbag. He has a certain smoothness (like John Edwards)-but he's definitely a good person to avoid.

http://thejewishreport.blogspot.com/2009/07/robert-jew-spencer-wanted-dead-or-alive.html

How seriously can one take someone with the name of Grover?

One feels almost sorry for Grover Freiherr von Norquist, Mr. Bones. For consider: his lordship must be pestered by all sorts of other Party-'n'-Ideology neocomrades with specialised axes to grind.

In addition to takin' a number and standin' in line, petitioners really ought to have taken the trouble in advance to frame their recitations and PowerPointin’s in such a way as to accomodate his lordship's special concerns, which are no secret. The man has been doin' business at the same stand since about the Wilson Administration, after all.

To be sure, this particular gaggle of petitioners may face special obstacles insofar as it not easy to think of even a BAD argument that tax cuts and _jihád_ watchin' are mutually reinforcin'. Alas, pretty well everythin' the J. W. gentry would like to do is likely to cost their Uncle Sam at least a few bucks, and some of their wilder druthers could easily run to godzillions.

***

More specifically, Neocomrade Rear-Colonel F. Gaffney's letter of solicitation makes a mistake, it seems to me, down in the bit about "what amount (_sic_) to open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens." With folks like his lordship who really matter in the world, the attempt to unilaterally and preëmptively tell the mark what he thinks is so likely to backfire that it should not be risked.

"Softly, softly, catchee monkey!"

(_Mais que sçay-je?_)

The "article" says Robert should be "shot on site." I wonder: does Kahlid mean his shitty little site or Robert's site?

Yes, awake, the most recent posting was middle of last year, but that only goes to show that simply no one has complained about it. I know Google will remove a site that calls for violence against anyone, so please use the link at the top of the Blogger page to report this abuse to The Big G.

Of course, here in the free world Kahlid's blog should be evidence of criminal offense. It's one thing to glorify the Nazis or revel in the death of one of the Abu Ghraib "torturers" (see site, if you have the stomach) but it's another to call openly for someone to be shot on sight.

What's he doing on this post anyway? I'm certain he doesn't know who Grover Norquist is, and the posted article won't help, because Kahlid is entirely illiterate, which is why he uploads boatloads of photos to his abandoned "blog."

Hugh, don't worry The "Grammar Police" are not holding forth on this site.

Grover Norquist's philosophies are strikingly similar to those of Pat Buchanan, who calls himself a conservative and yet is strikingly critical of Israel and has a most muted attitude towards Islam. As I recall, he recently wrote a book contesting the necessity of the U.S. going to war against Nazi Germany, and he is soft on Iran and sympathetic towards the Palestinians. Buchanan's sites attract lots of folks who spew anti-Israel and anti-Jew rhetoric and who are apologists for Islam, not to mention that they are sure that the CFR (run by Jews) is running this country and ushering in a one-world government.

Tom Campbell was a shill for Sami Al-Arian. Now he's running for US Senate in the Florida Republican primary...

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-senate9-2010mar09,0,7419294.story

It is imperative this man is defeated in the primary, not just because he's an apologist and is being obviously deceptive, but to send a message to the Norquist wing of the Party that associating with Jihadis is the political kiss of death for a Republican.

This piece was on Frontpagemag for a few minutes this afternoon:

"Frank Gaffney Needs Our Support In an Important Task: Getting the Right Back on Track in the Battle with Islamofascism

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/03/11/frank-gaffney-needs-our-support-in-an-important-task-getting-the-right-back-on-track-in-the-battle-with-islamofascism/

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we have a problem. Let’s review the evidence:

Exhibit A: Conservative icon Sarah Palin endorses Rand Paul for one of Kentucky’s Senate seats. The son of notorious non-interventionist Congressman Ron Paul is on record as describing his foreign policy views as “very, very similar” to his father’s.

Exhibit B: Ron Paul wins the Straw poll at CPAC. (More a symbolic victory than a substantive one given that he netted the votes of less than 10% of CPAC attendees but never the less the victory becomes a tool for his cult of unhinged, online evangelists.)

Exhibit C: CPAC fails to feature a single official panel addressing the threat of Islamofascism. The tenacious Pamela Geller is forced to hold her own panel independently.

Exhibit D: The most important conservative talk show host, Glenn Beck, calls anti-Jihad politician Geert Wilders a “fascist” on his Fox News show. In the next hour, Special Report with Bret Baier labels the Dutch freedom-advocate “far Right,” and not a single pro-Wilders voice can be found in a panel of conservative commentators........

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now it is gone. Who removed this and why?

according to wiki

" On April 2, 2005, Norquist married Kuwait-born Samah Alrayyes,[32] who until then had been the director of the Islamic Free Market Institute.

She is a CEO of her own communications firm and formerly a Public Affairs Specialist for Arab and Muslim outreach at the Bureau of Legislative and Public Affairs at USAID.[33][34]"

This is how totally rotten both Democrat and Republican parties are. Islamist Grover Norquist is a "Conservative Republican" (!). As I said here as early as Aug. 12, it is time for the new Center Party led by American heroes Rudy Giuliani and Paul Sperry. Enough sitting in the rot.

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Pamela Geller wrote: "....he (Norquist) has become increasingly associated with policies and initiatives that are strikingly at odds with the national security convictions and practices of the man he - and virtually all other conservatives - so admire: Ronald Reagan."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

True, national security when it came to the threat of Communism - which it could be argued pales in comparison to the threat from Islam. What were Reagan's national security convictions when it came to Islam? To be fair they were non-existent. Worse, Reagan condemned within the United Nations (UN Amb. Jeane Kirkpatrick voted to codemn Israel) and punished Israel for preemptively attacking the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq, a thing for which US forces were later thankful when we went to war with Iraq. According to a furious Secretary of State Alexander Haig, Vice President G.H.W. Bush and White House Chief of Staff, James Baker, in a meeting with Reagan, favored punishing Israel for the attacks.

President Reagan became hysterical when Menachem Begin ordered the 1982 invasion of Lebanon (Operation Peace for Galilee) in order to root out this gangster PLO which had set up shop in the small country, proceeding to persecute, torture and murder the Christian population, not to mention all the cross border terror attacks and rockets fired on Israel's northern communities. (Read Brigitte Gabriel's, "Because They Hate.")

Reagan was so obsessed with protecting this terror group and its leader, Yasser Arafat, he ordered the US Marines into Lebanon to protect the PLO and to help facilitate its removal to Tunis. It was a shameful affair, not to mention Reagan later supplying the Iranian jihadists arms in exchange for American hostages held by Hezbollah killers in Lebanon. Prior to this, Reagan vowed he would never negotiate with terrorists. Anyway, it was under Reagan's watch that 241 US Marines were murdered in a single deadly suicide bombing by an Iranian operative within Hezbollah. Osama bin Laden cited Reagan ordering our troops to cut and run from Lebanon as an example of American weakness and pusillanimity.

Little doubt, Reagan was a charismatic and a very gifted communicator. I voted for him in my youth at a time I had my mind on things besides foreign policy. Reagan's foreign policy in the Middle East was an unmitigated disaster. I wonder why conservatives are so enamoured of this man other than for his communication skills. He was no better - perhaps worse than others - handling the long-standing problem America has had with Islam.

I have grown very sick at heart of the silence or criticism of our so-called conservative spokesman about Geert Wilders. I recently wrote Glenn Beck about my disproval and unsubscribed from his news letter. I also wrote Brit Hume and Bret Baer to share my displeasure and to say I would no longer watch the Pannel. O'Reilly and Hannity are also on my list. I hope all JW readers will follow suit.

Grover Norquist has already been called out. he and his fellow quislings for Islamics who wrote the Mt Vernon Statement, were already pwned last year.

read the Thurmont Statement.

http://www.freedomleadershipconference.org

compare and contrast.